Chris Christie pushes back hard

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie acknowledged Monday that his office received a subpoena from the U.S. attorney, even as he pushed back at new allegations concerning his involvement in the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal.

When asked whether his office had directly received such an order, he replied, “Yes.”

Text Size

-

+

reset

“They did that, and I understand why they did it,” he said of the subpoena. “We had already communicated to them that we’d cooperate voluntarily. They decided to send a subpoena, and that’s fine. We are complying with that in the same way we are complying with legislative subpoenas.”

The remarks came during an “Ask the Governor” radio segment on New Jersey 101.5 FM. He didn’t provide a subpoena due date, but said his office would provide the needed documents, as they are doing for other ongoing investigations tied to the allegedly politically motivated lane closures at the center of the “Bridgegate” scandal.

He stressed several times that while he may have heard bits and pieces about the traffic problems last fall, they didn’t initially trigger alarm bells — and said that when it did register, he told his staff to explore the issue.

“There’s traffic every day,” he said, adding, “That’s not something that rises to the gubernatorial level.”

As Christie spoke, New Jersey newspapers reported that a top former aide to the governor, who was fired in the wake of the scandal, wouldn’t offer documents in response to a legislative subpoena.

By reportedly taking the Fifth, Bridget Anne Kelly, the former aide, joins former Christie campaign manager Bill Stepien, who asserted Fifth Amendment rights to fight his document subpoena last week, and former Christie Port Authority ally David Wildstein, who pleaded the Fifth when state lawmakers called him to testify on the lane closures in January.

“It doesn’t tell me anything,” Christie said of Kelly, adding, “I hope they would share information with us but I also understand people have rights.”

Kelly’s lawyer, Michael Critchley Sr., reportedly communicated Kelly’s move in a letter to a lawyer helping state lawmakers investigate the lane closures. Critchley did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“We just received Mr. Critchley’s letter,” said the Democratic lawmakers leading the investigation, Asm. John Wisniewski and Sen. Loretta Weinberg, in a statement. “We are reviewing it and considering our legal options with respect to enforcing the subpoena.”

On the show, Christie also reiterated his assertion that he didn’t have prior knowledge of the lane closures.

“The most important issue is: Did I know anything about the plan to close these lanes? Did I authorize it, did I know about it, did I approve it, [was there] any knowledge beforehand?” he said in his most extensive public remarks since the charges surfaced last week. “The answer is still the same: Unequivocally no.”

On Friday, a lawyer for Wildstein, a former Port Authority official who has been directly implicated in Bridgegate, said that “evidence exists … tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference.”

Christie, who held a lengthy press conference last month as the story broke, has said the issue first caught his attention when he saw media accounts, citing specifically a Wall Street Journal article featuring an email from Port Authority Executive Director Patrick Foye, who expressed concerns about the lane closures. He stuck to his timeline during Monday’s radio interview and dismissed some of the scrutiny as “just a game of gotcha.”

“First, I had nothing to do with this, no knowledge, no authorization, no planning, nothing to do with this before the decision was made to close these lanes by Port Authority,” he said. “Secondly, while I’m disappointed by what happened here, I’m determined to fix it.”

Christie, who was asked about the “Bridgegate” issues before taking questions from largely friendly listeners, was frequently discussed as a leading presidential candidate before the scandal broke, though he has tumbled dramatically in recent polls.

The activity on the George Washington Bridge was initially billed as a “traffic study,” and Christie said he wasn’t clear on whether such an effort ever occurred.

“I still don’t know if there was a traffic study,” he said. “Did it start as a traffic study and morph into political shenanigans, or did political shenanigans morph into a traffic study?”

On the show, he highlighted the internal investigation underway.

“Here’s what I’m curious about,” he said. “What I’m curious about is what happened here. That’s why I authorized an internal investigation. We hired a law firm to come in, do the investigation, they’re working really hard, diligently, and I can’t wait for it to be finished so I can get the full story.”

Rebekah Carmichael, a spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney in New Jersey, declined to comment on Christie’s mention of his office getting a federal subpoena.